On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 at 02:44, Andrew Zaborowski
wrote:
> * if I stop a CMLDS client and rerun it, it will receive the CMLDS
> notifications twice until the old subscription expires. If I restart
> it again quickly enough it'll receive each notification 3 times. This
> is beca
if (p->follow_up_info || p->transportSpecific == TS_CMLDS) /* FIXME */
port_nrate_calculate(p, t3c, t4);
tsproc_set_clock_rate_ratio(p->tsproc, p->nrate.ratio *
--
2.42.0
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 at 22:51, Andrew Zaborowski
wrote:
>
> On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 at 00:39, Richard Cochran wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 at 00:39, Richard Cochran wrote:
> @@ -306,13 +307,15 @@ static void do_set_action(struct pmc *pmc, int action,
> int index, char *str)
> "duration %hu "
> "NOTIFY_PORT_STATE %3s "
>
On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 at 00:39, Richard Cochran wrote:
> +# Common Mean Link Delay Service (CMLDS) example configuration for a
> +# CMLDS Link Port, containing those attributes which differ from the
While there's only one Link Port here I wouldn't mention this because
the CMLDS config basically has
On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 at 17:44, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 04:32:20PM +0100, Andrew Zaborowski wrote:
> > > + PORT_ITEM_STR("cmlds_client_address", "/var/run/cmlds_cleint"),
> >
> > I assume the use of this is simply to set u
Hi Richard,
I haven't tested this but here are some comments.
On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 at 08:58, Richard Cochran wrote:
> From: Kishen Maloor
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Cochran
> ---
> config.c | 4 ++
> dm.h | 3 +
> fd.h | 1 +
> makefile | 4 +-
> port.c
On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 at 05:50, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 01:41:19AM +0100, Andrew Zaborowski wrote:
> > Do you want to require the user to enforce that the port numbering is
> > the same between the ptp4l processes?
>
> No.
(I meant: do you want to
On Thu, 16 Nov 2023 at 23:46, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 11:11:50PM +0100, Andrew Zaborowski wrote:
> > The two timestamps are passed to clock_peer_delay() by the receiving
> > port and stored in c->tsproc. Then they're accessed by
> > get_r
On Thu, 16 Nov 2023 at 05:27, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 06:26:04PM -0400, Kishen Maloor wrote:
> > @@ -1129,6 +1130,27 @@ static int port_management_fill_response(struct port
> > *target,
> > memcpy(pwr, >pwr, sizeof(*pwr));
> > datalen =
On Tue, 9 May 2023 at 14:33, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 02:02:05PM +0200, Andrew Zaborowski wrote:
> > Per https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/timestamping.txt
> > section 3:
> > "User space is responsible to ensure that multiple
only check that the
timestamping mode is set to the desired values after acquiring a shared
lock.
The last instance exiting will be able to acquire an exclusive lock
again (all shared locks will have been released) and will reset the
timestamping mode to no timestamps.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Zaborowski
---
Ideally on
On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 at 05:17, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 09:04:59PM -0700, Kishen Maloor wrote:
> > Yes, we would configure CMLDS just once per physical port on a PTP node.
>
> Okay, so the code should check this.
>
> (Haven't reviewed yet, maybe you handle that already?)
On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 at 22:08, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 07:38:44PM +0100, Andrew Zaborowski wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 at 16:02, Richard Cochran
> > wrote:
> > > In the case of the PTP minor version field, there are already two
> > &g
On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 at 16:35, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 04:21:52PM +0100, Andrew Zaborowski wrote:
> > The (minor) problem this attempts to solve, and I didn't state that,
> > is the confusing semantics and reduced utility of port_is_ieee8021as
> > if o
On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 at 07:33, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 12:54:55AM +0100, Andrew Zaborowski wrote:
> > It seems that port_is_ieee8021as(p) returning zero if p->as_capable ==
> > ALWAYS_CAPABLE was originally intended for skipping checks in
> > port_c
p_info in the man page implies it
rather affects the Tx path. (The NRR will also need to be calculated
in a future CMLDS instance, with or without 802.1AS, so this if clause
will change again).
Signed-off-by: Andrew Zaborowski
---
Vinicius Gomes and myself tried to analyze configurations in
Hi Richard and Erez,
On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 at 16:02, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:36:07AM +0100, Erez wrote:
> > May break when using non Linuxptp, as far as I understand, linuxptp only
> > sets the field, but never checks the value.
>
> The risk is that some hardware
-by: Andrew Zaborowski
---
uds.c | 46 +++---
1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/uds.c b/uds.c
index 6d39dc8..4960bbe 100644
--- a/uds.c
+++ b/uds.c
@@ -23,7 +23,9 @@
#include
#include
#include
+#include
#include
+#include
on")
however, where ptp4l switches the version field to the IEEE1588-2019
value.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Zaborowski
---
The original patch added a per-port v1_hw_support option that would
force the previous controlField values but it wasn't implementing the
rest of the C.4.2 logic so with no
19 matches
Mail list logo
